Cyril Fagan wrote:

But the influences of the tropical signs must never be identified with their namesakes of the sidereal zodiac. To do so is to fall foul of the homonymous error. Those who dispute the validity of the sidereal zodiac are usually beguiled by the homonymous fallacy.

Cyril Fagan, The Solunars Handbook, Clancy Publications, 1970-76, p. 27.

Winding up this topic, the one concept that is very important from the sidereal point of view is that traits of a sign in the tropical zodiac are NOT the same in the same sign of the sidereal zodiac. This is the point Cyril Fagan and other early siderealists make in their writings. This is why as we perceive Pluto, it can be made to fit tropical Scorpio, but sidereal Aries. I think it says something about the lack of logical thinking among today's Jyotish astrologers that they don't see a problem when they copy traits of tropical Aries to sidereal Aries for example.

How can any specific sign of the zodiacs have exactly the same meaning when these two signs are located in different areas of the sky? Does the mindset of an astrologer determine the traits of a zodiac sign??

Take the 27 lunar mansions (formerly nakshatras) that everyone agrees are identified by specific stars in the sky. Any traits linked to these mansions and stars MUST be apparent in both zodiacs in the sky area where these stars are actually located. If any sidereal traits are linked to these stars, those traits should be apparent in a zodiac, no matter in which sign those stars are located.

We see this effect, for example, in tropical Scorpio which is basically split down the middle (approximately--in 1992 the degree split was at 13 Sco 45). The first half of Scorpio contains the feet of the starry Virgin while the constellation of Libra lies the second half. If anyone bothered to research the lives and personalities of individuals with Scorpio emphasis, they would see a distinct difference between these two parts of Scorpio. (Actually the last few degrees of tropical Scorpio belong to a third mansion which extends into Sagittarius.)

This is why we can't ignore any traits that happen to be linked to those stars and constellations. This is a whole new area of research for tropical astrologers in particular. Jyotish astrologers already consider the mansions in their work.

Of course determining the source of observed traits of signs is a major problem in itself!! And with the current state of non-research in astrology there is little proof for anything. All we can do is cite specific examples of life patterns and psychological traits for individuals.

I think for a complete astrology of zodiac signs we have to integrate the 12 sign concept (whose origin is in the west) with the 27 nakshatras of India. India doesn't have the 12 starry zodiac constellations, and the west doesn't have the sky patterns of the 27 mansions/nakshatras. So the sky has been broken up in two different ways.

Therese, Eris belongs in our solar system. If it didn't, it would be orbiting some other star.

Please check out the link to Eris that I gave in my post of December 7 in the theoi website. It is a compendium of all known extant classical primary sources listed under each deity. You can't just rely on a simple genealogy in one secondary source because the ancient authors themselves gave different versions.

Homer gave Eris's parentage to Zeus and Hera. You can't get more mainstreamed than that, although other sources differed. As the sister of Mars and the personification of warfare and strife, mythological Eris was not a minor figure. [See the myth where she was credited with initiating the Trojan War.]

Let me remind you that Saturn and Uranus were not Olympians.

The radius of dwarf planet Eris is 1163 km.

The radius of Pluto is 1188 km.

The are certainly comparable.

The radius of Chiron is 136 km.

Edgar Cayce is not a credible source. Some of his predictions and pseudo-histories were wrong. He was also a devout Christian, so that if one accepts his pronouncements as "gospel truth," there are some real gospels to get to.

"Edgar Cayce is not a credible source."

spoken like an arrogant pompous university prof, lol... i know a lot of them feel the same way about astrology in generall - "not a credible source"...

James, unfortunately, glib insults do not change the hard evidence about
Edgar Cayce. It's problematic, no matter who draws it to your attention. Like his prediction of the destruction of LA, and the 2nd coming of Christ in 1998.

Best wishes for the holiday season. Maybe Santa will leave this book under your Christmas tree. It's fairly balanced as these things go.

https://www.sunypress.edu/p-2833-edgar- ... ntext.aspx

I believe that Cayce's organization published a book on his relatively few predictions that didn't come true. The organization is quite open in discussing these cases. I may have this book in my extensive library which is housed in several rooms...not taking time to look right now.

However the great majority of Cayce's readings were helpful notes on how to treat and cure various illness and diseases, many of which puzzled the doctors. His many readings that mention astrological factors (primarily the planets) are published for review and study. Also several authors who are not affiliated with Cayce organization (A.R.E.) have written books on Cayce's astrology. Cayce is much too important and genuine to blithely toss off with a comment or two.

I did just find this in my 'ready to read' stack of books on an open shelf:

A.R.E. Press book published in 2012: Earth Changes, Historical, Economical, Political and Global:

Chapter 4: "Changes--Inaccurate, Misinterpreted or Partially Wrong" (pp. 89-105)
Chapter 5: "Changes in World Affairs" (pp. 106-156)

Therese, I think your sources are preaching to the choir, or the converted, as the case may be.

You might also consider Cayce's "cures" that failed, or that the "seer" apparently didn't realize that some of the cure requests concerned patients who had already died by the time Cayce got to them and offered his cures. One skeptic painstakingly matched Cayce's trance statements to things he was recently reading in the newspaper or picked up from other mystics of the day. Some of his prescriptions were common folk remedies.

Whatever Cayce's abilities might have been as a psychic, I would put no credibility on him in assigning planetary sign rulerships.

In a partial answer to James, just because we practice astrology does not mean we have to uncritically accept any other mystical truth-claim that comes along.

Cayce didn't assign rulerships to signs. He merely said that "Vulcan and Pluto were one and the same."

Waybread, something seems to be eating you, expressed as anger and bitterness. So I'm leaving this conversation.

waybread wrote:Michael-- re: your OP.

So no to Pluto as ruler of Aries. If we want a candidate for Aries, dwarf planet Eris is a much better fit.

In my view, Eris is one of the seven major bodies of the Kuiper Belt or "Seven Dwarfs" (as our forum friend Cruiser 1 a.k.a. Walter Pullen likes to call them), along with Haumea, Makemake, Gonggong, Quaoar, Sedna, and Orcus. The Kuiper Belt I regard as the asteroid belt's analogy in the outer solar system. Much like most of us don't consider asteroids as sign rulers, neither should we see the plutoids as such. Arbitrarily introducing one of them would disrupt the rulership scheme, which remains the theoretical foundation of astrology, even in its modern extension.

Pluto however is still in the league of astrological planets, for reasons I have discussed in my Transpluto topic.

Pluto has an inexorable quality to it. A hard Pluto transit will kill off anything metaphorically dead or dying in one's life. It does have an underworld quality to it. It does have the quality of the Phoenix, but the death in the ashes part is essential and not to be circumvented.

And so is Pluto's quality of resurrection.

In temperate climates of the northern hemisphere, the month of Scorpio coincides with deciduous trees losing their leaves, frost hitting the planets, the sun well to the south, shorter days, and a sort of "death" or under-ground period of nature.

In the Mediterranean region, autumn is a time for the fall planting of winter wheat and barley, with the seeds going underground, Persephone-like, to e-emerge with the winter rains.

Our zodiacal month is derived from the Babylonian calendar, with early spring being the time for the new crop of lambs.

Nature indeed "goes underground" in Fall and reawakens come Spring. As the story goes, Hades abducted Persephone to his chthonic realm, bringing on an endless winter; but he eventually consented to release her to be reunited with her mother during the warmer seasons.

In astrology, Pluto's influence not only conceals things, but also makes them (violently) burst out into the open.

Pluto therefore matches both Scorpio and Aries, he is of a profoundly bipolar nature. And I increasingly believe that astrologers should assign the trans-Saturnians double rulerships, just as has always been the case with the traditional planets.

As Geoffrey Chaucer put it in the 14th century:

"Whan that Aprille with his shoures sote

The droghte of Marche hath perced to the rote,

And bathed every veyne in swich licour,

Of which vertu engendred is the flour;

Whan Zephirus eek with his swete breeth

Inspired hath in every holt and heeth

The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne

Hath in the Ram his halfe cours y-ronne,

And smale fowles maken melodye....

Than longen folk to goon on pilgrimages...:

Michael Sternbach wrote:

Pluto however is still in the league of astrological planets, for reasons I have discussed in my Transpluto topic.

Michael, can you please post a link to your Transpluto topic?

Therese Hamilton wrote:Michael wrote:

As for Edgar Cayce, he said many fascinating and inspiring things. Just for the record, I was a member of the A.R.E. myself for a short while and have a collection of the sleeping prophet's readings on a CD-ROM. However, I do take some of his statements with a grain of salt.

Do you have a CD that works??!! I have three going back to the days of DOS, but none of them will work now. The only way to access the readings is to become an A.R.E. member.

Well, if you no longer own a computer that is able to run the disk, perhaps this new version would be an option?

https://www.amazon.com/New-Complete-Edg ... 0876045115

Therese Hamilton wrote:Michael Sternbach wrote:

Pluto however is still in the league of astrological planets, for reasons I have discussed in my Transpluto topic.

Michael, can you please post a link to your Transpluto topic?

Voilà madame!

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8402